吕澂论因明与佛学论证CSSCI

西方逻辑学传播和从日本输入因明后的直接影响是在民国时期出现佛教逻辑研究,最明显的表现是大多研究者形成因明的三支论式与亚里士多德三段论的一致性的观念,即新因明结构宗、因、喻分别对应三段论结论、小前提、大前提。吕澂则从历时性角度,站在法称量论理论框架下,研究因明的内容,认为因明等同于量论,包含论证结构及其规则、论证的认识论基础和论证在佛学中运用三部分内容,这就是佛家逻辑。吕澂的研究是因明创新研究的一个范例,是对窥基因明研究的一种逻辑转向,助益于当今佛教逻辑学科建设,但是,基于包含佛教逻辑在内的逻辑边界,吕澂并没有清晰的回答,使得在佛学论证中各持己说,这是吕澂给我们留下来研究的课题。     

由印度因明谱系看其思想演变

由具体的因明谱系即各人物关系为导线，厘清弥勒、无著、世亲到陈那的论式的发展，并由此从指引指号和非对称包涵等现代逻辑的角度来阐释十支、五支再到三支论式的必然性的发展脉络。最后对陈那的“一切言皆妄”与其弟子商羯罗主的“我母是石女”加以比较，并看因明思想传承的另一种情况。     

试论因明论式中的"喻"

因明是世界上三大逻辑起源之一,源于印度,传于中国和东亚.就其逻辑论式而言,主要有古因明的五支式和新因明的三支式,"宗"、"因"、"喻"是其主要组成部分.本文就论式中的"喻"做以下分析一、"喻"在古因明到新因明论式演变中的变化及作用.二、"喻依"的去留与三支论式的性质.三、"喻"的称谓问题.对"喻"的研究有利于科学地认识和评价因明论式的逻辑价值.挖掘其中所蕴含的瑰宝,使因明这一优秀的世界文化遗产得到继承和发展.     

从现代逻辑观点看中国古代的有效推理

中国古代逻辑也是研究推理和论证的。推理和论证的主要目的是揭示一个命题为真的原因或理由。推理关系是一种 ＂必然地得出＂ 的关系。墨子提出了四种推理模式：＂辟＂、＂侔＂、＂援＂、＂推＂,而且把 ＂推＂ 又分为两种 ＂止＂,即归纳＂止＂ 式推论和演绎 ＂止＂ 式推论。特别地,墨家提出了 ＂效＂ 作为判定推理是否有效的标准。     

新古三论略议

三论宗是以龙树的《中论》、《十二门论》和提婆的《百论》为所依,宣扬空、无相、八不中道等义理的宗派。由姚秦时罗什传来的三论学,谓古三论;而由僧朗、僧诠、吉藏所传的三论学,称为新三论。新、古之分,不仅因其在传承和时间上,就是在产生的背景、思想和影响上均有差别。     

现代新儒学发展的逻辑与趋向

本文认为,如何从儒家内在的理论立场出发来贯通道德理性与理智理性,如何从素重德性的儒学传统中发展出知性主体,以为理智理性在儒学传统中确立内在根据,内在地决定了现代新儒学之发展嬗变。就贯通德性与理性的不同方式而言,现代新儒家分为“尊德性”与“道问学”两个系统。从现代新儒学的发展历程看,“尊德性”一系的理路在现时代已经到了尽头,而“道问学”一系在实现了根本性变革之后,为儒学的发展注入了新的生命活力,它不仅推进了儒学的现代化,而且使儒学获得了崭新的存在形态。     

从《逻辑哲学论》看西方哲学的实践转向

《逻辑哲学论》是维特根斯坦的重要哲学著作,对当代哲学的发展产生了深远影响。但是,到目前为止,我们对这本著作的重要结构并没有给出一个令人满意的解释。在本文中,我试图通过对这本书的     

德性之知与见闻之知:从宋明儒家到现代新儒家

侯外庐先生在谈到中、西哲学的不同时说过:中国哲学家大都是“贤人”,西方哲学家大都是“智者”。这种概括无疑是精辟和中肯的。中国贤人一直都把德性之知放在首位,而不大重视见闻之知。因此,在中国哲学中,道德哲学尤其发达,而知识哲学则得不到充分发展。前者诚为我国哲学之优势,而后者则无疑是需要加以改进的。本文试图通过考察宋明儒家和现代新儒家对德性之知与见闻之知的看法,从某一侧面展示“贤人”哲学的流变与得失。     

从现象学角度看佛教因明中的遮诠问题

笔者在此提出并尝试论证以下三个命题：其一,应当区分佛教因明中与为他比量相关的“遮诠”方法以及可以运用在整个量论领域的“遮遣”方法。具体地说,“遮诠”只是“遮遣”的一种,即专指运用于概念语言领域的遮遣方法。其二,现象学本质直观思想的提出,消解了量论中现量与比量的严格区分,并可以导致对感知、思维、判断、推理、自相、共相、概念、语词等范畴的重新理解。其三,表诠一遮诠方法、连同整个因明,在中国佛教史上乃至在整个佛教史上始终发展不兴,很大原因在于它们被人为地限定在语言层面。     

Probabilistic reasoning in a classical logic

We offer a view on how probability is related to logic. Specifically, we argue against the widely held belief that standard classical logics have no direct way of modelling the certainty of assumptions in theories and no direct way of stating the certainty of theorems proved from these (uncertain) assumptions. The argument rests on the observation that probability densities, being functions, can be represented and reasoned with naturally and directly in (classical) higher-order logic.     

The functioning of religions from a modern psychoanalytic perspective

This paper considers the personal psychological development which can take place in the adherents of certain religions, and compares it with the personal development which can take place in a psychoanalysis. The author argues that the preoccupations of different religions are very various, and to understand their functioning it is important to recognise the variety of their goals. Using the Kleinian notion of psychic ‘positions', and with the help of a neuro-scientific model, it becomes possible to conceptualise the psychological effectiveness of both psychoanalysis and the religions, and to relate them intelligibly. There continues, however, to be a radical difference between the ways in which psychoanalysis and the religions cause their psychological effects, which is best seen by considering the nature of their objects.     

Disagreement about logic from a pluralist perspective

Philosophical Studies - Logical pluralism is commonly described as the view that there is more than one correct logic. It has been claimed that, in order for that view to be interesting, there has...     

The belief-bias effect in formal reasoning: The influence of knowledge on logic

The present study examines the applicability of a rational model of categorical inference (e.g., Revlis, 1975b) to account for the apparently irrational decisions students reach on categorical syllogisms. In Experiment 1, students judged the logical validity of emotionally neutral conclusions to controversial premises. Of the reasoners’ decisions, 80% can be accounted for by the application of rational rules to their idiosyncratic encoding of the syllogistic premises. In Experiment 2, students were asked to solve syllogisms whose conclusions varied in truth value. When asked to reason about controversial, if not emotional, material, students do not suspend rational choice, but rather, their decisions are judicious ones, flowing logically from their idiosyncratic understanding of the materials reasoned about. When errors do occur, they result from an interrupt to rational processes and reflect conflict between competing goals rather than a switch to irrational decision processes.     

On the conflict between logic and belief in syllogistic reasoning

Three experiments are reported that investigate the weighting attached to logic and belief in syllogistic reasoning. Substantial belief biases were observed despite controls for possible conversions of the premises. Equally substantial effects of logic were observed despite controls for two possible response biases. A consistent interaction between belief and logic was also recorded; belief bias was more marked on invalid than on valid syllogisms. In all experiments, verbal protocols were recorded and analyzed. These protocols are interpreted in some cases as providing rationalizations for prejudiced decisions and, in other cases, as reflecting a genuine process of premise to conclusion reasoning. In the latter cases, belief bias was minimal but still present. Similarly, even subjects who focus primarily on the conclusion are influenced to an extent by the logic. Thus a conflict between logic and belief is observed throughout, but at several levels of extent.     

A two-valued logic for reasoning about different types of consequence in Kleene's three-valued logic

A formal language of two-valued logic is developed, whose terms are formulas of the language of Kleene's three-valued logic. The atomic formulas of the former language are pairs of formulas of the latter language joined by consequence operators. These operators correspond to the three sensible types of consequence (strong-strong, strong-weak and weak-weak) in Kleene's logic in analogous way as the implication connective in the classical logic corresponds to the classical consequence relation. The composed formulas of the considered language are built from the atomic ones by means of the classical connectives and quantifiers.A deduction system for the developed language is given, consisting of a set of decomposition rules for sequences of formulas. It is shown that the deduction system is sound and complete.